Nude litigants head for Chancery Division

The Press Association has reported that fashion designer Stella McCartney's company is facing legal action from Nude Skincare following a dispute over the use of the word "nude".
Stella McCartney Ltd had planned to release its new fragrance Stella Nude. However, Nude Skincare, run by eco-entrepreneur Bryan Meehan and Bono's wife Ali Hewson, have objected to the company's decision to use the word "nude" in the title of its fragrance. The proceedings, which are scheduled for an autumn airing in the Chancery Division of the High Court for England and Wales, are also being brought against YSL Beauté (part of L'Oréal), Stella McCartney's licensee.

Basenotes reports that Stella Nude "blends top notes of Moroccan rose and grapefruit with heart notes of white peony and pink pepper. The base features notes of Ugandan vanilla and grey amber".

The IPKat, who will keep an eye out for further developments, would like more legal detail, noting that Times Online's Law Central makes it appear that this is a trade mark dispute rather than passing off, and that the claimant is Nude Brands Ltd, rather than Nude Skincare.

Merpel is astonished at the number of trade marks in the UK/EU which contain the word NUDE. For example, Nude Brands Ltd has registered for goods and services in Classes 3, 4, 5, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 43 and 44: these include dental wax, beard dyes, meat, fish, poultry and game, preparations for destroying vermin, abrasive preparations (ouch!) ...

Tufty wonders, though: how did NUDE get through for massage and suntanning?
Nude litigants head for Chancery Division Nude litigants head for Chancery Division Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, August 13, 2009 Rating: 5


  1. Absent real nudity, it's surely deceptively misdescriptive ... or maybe it's meant to be perfume worn by nudists... ;-)

  2. There is a hearing before Mr Justice Floyd at 2 p.m. on Monday 17 August. I don't know whether cats will be admitted to the public gallery.

  3. The decision is now available at:


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.